Manikrao Laxmanrao Kausal vs Mansi Amit Murarka — 1/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 10th March 2026.

Cri.Rev.App.

CNR: MHAK010000432026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

31-12-2025

Filing Number

24/2026

Filing Date

03-01-2026

Registration No

1/2026

Registration Date

03-01-2026

Court

District and Session Court , Akola

Judge

4-District Judge III Akola

Decision Date

10th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438

Petitioner(s)

Manikrao Laxmanrao Kausal

Adv. Pali R.R.

Respondent(s)

Mansi Amit Murarka

Hearing History

Judge: 4-District Judge III Akola

10-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

Judgment

06-03-2026

Arguments

13-02-2026

Arguments

09-02-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

10-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Judge at Akola dismissed the criminal revision petition filed by the accused in a cheque bounce case (Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act). The court held that the order rejecting the accused's application for handwriting expert opinion on a disputed cheque was interlocutory in nature and thus revision petitions against such orders are not maintainable under Section 438(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Additionally, the court found the accused's defence lacking bonafide, as the cheque was dishonored for insufficient funds—not signature discrepancy—and the accused had failed to raise this issue when replying to the original notice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Judge at Akola dismissed the criminal revision petition filed by the accused in a cheque bounce case (Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act). The court held that the order rejecting the accused's application for handwriting expert opinion on a disputed cheque was interlocutory in nature and thus revision petitions against such orders are not maintainable under Section 438(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Additionally, the court found the accused's defence lacking bonafide, as the cheque was dishonored for insufficient funds—not signature discrepancy—and the accused had failed to raise this issue when replying to the original notice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Session Court , Akola All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case